From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QISZo-0008WT-IB for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 06 May 2011 23:28:44 +0200 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QISXF-0006PA-3j for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 06 May 2011 23:26:05 +0200 Received: from ip545070eb.adsl-surfen.hetnet.nl ([84.80.112.235]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 06 May 2011 23:26:05 +0200 Received: from koen by ip545070eb.adsl-surfen.hetnet.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 06 May 2011 23:26:05 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 23:25:49 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1304653677-2982-1-git-send-email-raj.khem@gmail.com> <1304666954.3162.3.camel@lenovo.internal.reciva.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip545070eb.adsl-surfen.hetnet.nl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101127 Shredder/3.0.11pre In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Subject: Re: [meta-oe][PATCH] conf/layer.conf: Use .= for BBPATH and += for BBFILES X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 21:28:44 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 06-05-11 21:59, Khem Raj wrote: > On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Phil Blundell wrote: >> On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 20:47 -0700, raj.khem@gmail.com wrote: >>> # We have a conf and classes directory, prepend to BBPATH to prefer our versions >>> -BBPATH := "${LAYERDIR}:${BBPATH}" >>> +BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}" >> >> This patch seems to cause the code to do the opposite of what the >> comment says. If changing it to be an append rather than a prepend is >> deliberate, please adjust the comment to match. (It would also be nice >> to have some commentary in the commit message explaining why this is >> being done, since it isn't obvious to me why append would be better.) >> > That comment should be fixed. Since previously I has prepend and then > changed it to append but forgot > to correct the comment. > It needed to follow some order for consistency and I chose append. Now > it depends on the order of > layers specified in BBLAYERS from bblayer.conf. Which means 1st entry > gets priority > over second entry when bitbake searches BBPATH. Right now there are > two criteria's > BBFILES are selected per priority set by BBFILES_PRIORITY for the > layer but BBPATHs dont have this > capability they get searched as they appear in the list. Ideally I > would think it would be simpler to have just one order for BBFILES and > BBPATH > so if BBPATHS followed the BBFILES priority too would make it easier > to comprehend. For meta-oe we need 2 different things: 1) prepend to BBPATH to get our classes in first (e.g. kernel.bbclass, gnome.bbclass) 2) append to BBFILES to use our version of recipes (.bbs) and overrides (.bbappends) It seems that using layer priorities won't work the way we need it. regards, Koen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFNxGddMkyGM64RGpERAtQMAJwM1W5k0Z9CgxlBYq82O6b39kLDcwCfTNO7 Qv6TUjazbpj5vYb6Ex0nxWQ= =J/NZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----